Skip to main content

About your Search

20121118
20121118
STATION
FOXNEWS 11
MSNBC 4
MSNBCW 4
CNN 2
CNNW 2
WTTG 2
KNTV (NBC) 1
KQED (PBS) 1
KRCB (PBS) 1
KTVU (FOX) 1
WBAL (NBC) 1
WBFF (FOX) 1
WRC (NBC) 1
LANGUAGE
English 43
Search Results 0 to 42 of about 43 (some duplicates have been removed)
, the eteuscandal petraeus the largest oil producer, but will the obama administration let it happen or turn an oil boom into a bust? welcome to the journal editorial report, i'm paul gigot. headed into friday, fiscal cliff talks with congressional leaders, president obama gave us a hit list of his negotiations strategies, repeating his intention to immediately raise tax rates on top earners. >> when it comes to the top 2%, what i'm not going to do is to extend further a tax cut for folks who don't need it which would cost close to a trillion dollars and it's very difficult to see how you make up that trillion dollars if we're serious about deficit reduction, just by closing loopholes and deductions. the math tends not to work. >> paul: but does the president's math add up? let's ask wall street journal columnist bill mcguerin, and analyst steve moore and washington columnist kim strassel. so, kim, the president won reelection, was this the hand of magnimty reaching out to the republicans? >> it's crazy, it's what the president says all the time. if you listen to the press conference, he seems to s
in distress and obama's eternalistic bravado of a top administrative official is going to come back to haunt him. she's a big girl in a big position and she should defend herself and what she said. >> i don't think it's necessarily a right wing smackdown of susan rice, it's the liberal media make it go about john mccain's comments about susan rice and john mccain never used the word filibuster. he said he would have serious issues susan rice as secretary of state. i agree with judy, what is susan rice doing representing the administration on these talk shows? she had nothing to to do with this, why is she the point person. >> it's not her fault. maybe have an administration with putting her out there, but not to say she shouldn't be secretary of state because she's somehow wrong here, but we have a fair amount of excavating to do, and on friday, peter king, i think an exclusive for fox and megyn kelly saying listen we now know that the cia, peter king knows that the cia initial chronology, benghazi's acts was altered somewhere along the way, did susan rice alter it herself, does she know who
the obama administration for what he calls its indifference. >> we have to go back and re-examine the diplomatic setting, if you will. people will be pushed to say, we can't afford to ignore this region. we can't afford to ignore this conflict because we look back on the last four years and the indifference, if you will, of the obama administration to what's happening on the west bank in gaza. and i think there will be pressure. there will be pressure from egypt, from turkey. there will be pressure from qatar. these are the places that are most sympathetic to hamas. >> discussing the u.s. response to the israeli/palestinian crisis. >>> we've got a lot more planned for you this saturday night. here's what else we're working on. the new reality and a rude awakening for the gop. get with it or keep losing. >>> the new faces of congress, gay, bisexual, hindu. meet those making capitol hill more diverse than ever. >>> the new normal. when it comes to sex, batteries and technology are involved. >>> all that plus a real-life soap opera unfolding in washington. you can't write thi
that wasn't how the obama administration initially described it publicly. representative peter king of new york said petraeus had briefed the house intelligence committee on september 14, and he does not recall petraeus being so positive at the time that it was a terrorist attack. he thought all along that he made it clear there was terrorist involvement, king said. that was not my recollection. so senator feinstien, did petraeus contradict himself or has he contradicted the white house's version of events? >> we have a transcript of that meeting on that day. and petraeus very clearly said that it was a terrorist attack. and outlined who he thought might be involved in it. so any -- >> this is right after the attack? >> that's the day after the attack. i think there's no question about it. what has concerned me about this is really the politicization of a public statement that was put out by the entire intelligence committee, which susan rice on the 16th, who was asked to go before the people and use that statement, did. i have read every one of the five interviews she did that day. she wa
with a senior fellow at the hoover institution. he singled out the obama administration for what he calls its indifference. >> we have to go back and re-examine the diplomatic setting, if you will. people will be pushed to say, we can't afford to ignore this region. we can't afford to ignore this conflict because we look back on the last four years and the indifference, if you will, of the obama administration to what's happening on the west bank in gaza. and i think there will be pressure. there will be pressure from egypt, from turkey. there will be quaepressure from qatar. these are the places that are most sympathetic to hamas. >> discussing the u.s. response to the israeli/palestinian crisis. >>> we've got a lot more planned for you this saturday night. here's what else we're working on. the new reality and a rude awakening for the gop. get with it or keep losing. >>> the new faces of congress, gay, bisexual hindu. meet those making capitol hill more diverse than ever. >>> the new normal. when it comes to sex, batteries and technology are involved. >>> all that plus a real-life soap oper
-- is not a biographer to come on, colby. >> is the obama administration guilty of a cover-up in the benghazi attack? >> i think she knew better, and if she did no better, she should not be the voice of america. . >> for them to go after the u.n. ambassador, who had nothing to do with benghazi, and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence she had received, and to besmirch her reputation, is outrageous. >> they're talking about our u.n. ambassador, who could be the president's nominee to be secretary of state. this is about her appearance on talk shows on september 16 following the september 11 attacks in benghazi. charles krauthammer, our friend here, who is off this week -- i think he is in miami traveling -- has been hammering away at this for weeks but he said that it was fun cover story in the run-up to the election. what do we know about this? .> we don't know yet maybe the intelligence committees have some notion, but we really don't know yet. they are still conducting the investigation within the state department. it seems like there were 85 things going on at once. i am not cle
'm not sure in the alternative what advantage anyone thinks the obama administration was going to get by misleading. the event happened. did anyone think the obama administration was trying to preserve some illusion that terrorists never would hit us as long as obama was president? we have been at war with terrorists 11 years and lost thousands of lives. i don't understand the point that graham is making, and the idea to question why did you put susan rice on the talk shows? administrations make decisions every week about who they will put out to repeat talking points. it doesn't really make much sense to me to be honest. >> to that end, then, amy, you have senator graham, other republicans, john mccain for one, they are calling for a special prosecutor. john harwood brings up these questions, but does it ego to the level of needing a special prosecutor? how far do you think this will go? >> clearly there is a movement on the republican side to keep this going. as we heard senators graham and mccain want a special investigation. we have representative mike enentire, the chairman of th
was describing that the obama administration did, that is called governing. >> yeah. let's go to david. why would he use words like this. this is the way he thinks unless he's being scripted. this was unscripted. this is the pure romney. >> chris, i was the first guy in the media to see the 47% remark and when i saw it i couldn't believe it. maybe there was a slight chance that maybe he was saying to it play up to that crowd, that's what they wanted to hear. now when we hear him talk about voters he didn't just say he was bought off, that obama won their votes through bribery. he said i ran a campaign of big ideas. so they are the moochers, they are victims who will pay them the most. in the end what happens, mitt romney portrays himself as a victim of the victims. so just confirms all the worst impressions from the 47% rant and now you have republicans running away from him and basically saying hey don't let the car elevator door hit you on the way out. >> let me go to one thoughtful conservative. who i usually agree with. he's a smart guy. he writes for "the weekly standard." it seems to me tha
the affair and effectively black mailed him to taylor his testimony about benghazi so it would suit the obama administration? >> no, i don't think so. you have to know david pert - petraeus. he would not have done that and i would suspect if somebody tried to black mail him or influence. he would come out and let everyone know. he testified before congress numerous times. i was with him in five of those times. and he will tell it straight forward based on the information he had at the time. >> we know it changes over time. >> you he's finding out more in the fog of war through about the benghazi. >> i think over time more and more information becomes. i was not the testimony. or he wouldn't have told me what he said . i have to leave it there. thank you for coming out and speakingitous. eye spirited debate. and much more on general petraeus and the probe we labeled benghazi gate. with the spark cash card from capital one, sven gets great rewards for his small business! how does this thing work? oh, i like it! [ garth ] sven's small business earns 2% cash back on every purche, everday! woo-hoo
months, the obama administration has proposed thousands of new government regulations. how those could affect you, your family, job and business. we ask a guest from the national federation of independent business next. sometimes what we suffer from is bigger than we think ... like the flu. with aches, fever and chills- the flu's a really big deal. so why treat it like it's a little cold? there's something that works differently than over-the-counter remedies. prescription tamiflu attacks the flu virus at its source. so don't wait. call your doctor right away. tamiflu is prescription medicine for treating the flu in adults and children one year and older whose flu symptoms started within the last two days. before taking tamiflu tell your doctor if you're pregnant, nursing. have serious health conditions, or take other medicines. if you develop an allergic reaction, a severe rash, or signs of unusual behavior, stop taking tamiflu and call your doctor immediately. children and adolescents in particular may be at an increased risk of seizures, confusion or abnormal behavior. the most comm
he are going to see happen. >>> he knew it was terrorism, he told them so. why did the obama administration change david ' talking points in the benghazi attacks i will ask a congressman when we come back before copd... i took my son fishing every year. we had a great spot, not easy to find, but worth it. but with copd making it hard to breathe, i thought those days might be over. so my doctor prescribed symbicort. it helps significantly improve my lung function starting within five minutes. symbicort doesn't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden symptoms. with symbicort, today i'm breathing better. and that means...fish on! symbicort is for copd including chronic bnchitis and emphysema. it should not be taken more than twice a day. symbirt may increase your risk of lung infections, osteoporosis, d some eye problems. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. with copd, i thought i'd miss our family tradition. now symbicort significantly improves my lung function, starting within 5 minutes. and that makes a difference in my breathin
altered his testimony about benghazi because members of the administration or someone knew about this affair and effectively blackmailed him to tailor his testimony about benghazi so it would suit the obama administration? >> no. i don't think so. you have t to know david petrae. he would not have done that. in fact, i would suspect that if somebody had tried to black mail him or influence him a certain way, he would do the exact opposite anden come out and let everyone know. he's testified before congress numerous times. i was with him during five of those times, and he will tell it straight forward the way it is based on the information he has at that time. we know truth changes over time a little bit as you get more information. >> so you think that's what's happening now, he's just finding out more through the fog of war about benghazi? >> well, i think over time more and more information becomes available. i wasn't at the testimony yesterday. i don't have the need to know or the clearance to know any more, and he wouldn't have told me exactly what he said anyway because he d
, he told them so. why did the obama administration change david ' talking points in the benghazi attacks i will ask a congressman when we come back . [ applause ] >> mike: friday former cia director general david petraeus met with the senate and house intelligence committees in closed door hearings. according to new york congressman peter king, petraeus testified, under oath that he knew right way that the benghazi attacks that killed four americans were terrorism. according to king, petraeus also said, that his original talking points about islamic extremists were taken out of the administration's narrative on attacks. the question is, who made those changes and why? joining me is south carolina congressman trey gowdy. nice to have you back on the show. [ applause ] >> good to see you governor. >> mike: is there any way possible that the white house did not know that this was terrorism? now that you have her the testimony of general petraeus. >> of course not. they knew before anyone else knew that it was terrorism. why would the department of state, the cia, department of defen
. senators john mccain and lindsey graham are calling this "a result of the obama administration's failed foreign policy." >>> the white house says it did not change the cia's talking talking points in libya. at some point it was changed to extremist organizations. friday former cia director petraeus said the cia always knew terrorism was involved in the attack. >> the issue is from what was released cia friday afternoon to the moment it was changed to the sunday morning talk shows, there's a gap of 48 hours we need to account for. >> all the intelligence community have told us that initially they recognize there were extremists and terrorists involved but thought it came from a protest, that it took them time to sort that out, that there was no political spin in this. >> u.s. ambassador to the united nations susan rice said on the sunday after the attack it had been provoked by an anti- muslim video. we'll have more when we get a preview of fox news sunday at 8:30. >>> here at home, nine teenagers are under arrest after a pair of attacks at the woodly park metro station. it started with
it tell us about the whole approach, the light footprint that the obama administration recommended. >> chris: what would that be? i haven't heard that phrase until today. but it is in the papers. >> the idea that once we had gadhafi out in libya, we weren't going to go in with a big new presence and huge new diplomatic installation and we were going to try and do more sort of with less as it were. >> chris: not in libya... >> and that is being applied across the region as well. >> chris: it is interesting, up to this point, secretary of state clinton has kind of avoided much fire of libya. she said that she was taking responsibility for it, but that was in the middle of the night, at an interview down in south america. and she has been absent from the hearings, so far. as they focus, maybe less on the timeline and more on the question of why these diplomats were so undefended, so vulnerable, with all the warnings before hand, could secretary clinton come under fire. >> she'll have to answer questions, but i imagine what she'll say is they didn't realize how vulnerable they were and
of the surveillance in the wake of 9/11. thanks to the petri at act and continued under the obama administration. the government has more access to info about us than at anytime in history. a small example of what this looks like. check out this graph of u.s. government from google. these are requests that don't require warrants and this doesn't include the security related requests not disclosed. for awhile, i thought the combination of these trends, the u bik wiity of technology was pushing us to a future where citizens would be unable to keep their secrets while the government keeps its secrets. i feared it would end up totally exposed to each other and the state. the state and its doing and what it's doing in our name would be a mystery. then miraculously, but also inevitably, they collided with each other in the petraeus affair. the four-star general's communications with broadwell reveal a lot of mundane personal failings. really, it seems not anything scandalous as far as the public's fear goes. the only possible scandal, as far as i can tell, is the conditions which the fbi came to read
which is populated by obama administration appoint tees, is where the narrative apparently changed. greg. >> the white house came out yesterday and said, you know what, we didn't make any critical changes. we made one minor little change about the word "facility" but everything else we didn't touch. what did that? >> that's right. that word came from deputy national security advisor ben rhodes who was talk being aboard air force one. today a senator of georgia speaking on fox news sunday suggested that every intelligence community leader who has testified thus far has suggested that other changes were made. >> the hearing we had on thursday and friday, we had every leader of the intelligence community there, including folks from the state department, the fbi. everybody there was asked do you know who made these changes? and nobody knew. the only entity that reviewed the talking points that was not there was the white house. >> independent senator joe leiberman said today a watergate style committee is not needed to figure out answers to the benghazi attacks. >> the senator went on to sor
by once again welcoming president barack obama and his administration to thailand. thailand is the first country president obama choose to visit following the election less than two weeks ago. we recognize the significance of the president and we all thank you for being here today. president obama, it is the perfect occasion to launch the celebration of 180 anniversary of thailand next year. i thank president obama and secretary clinton for actively promo promote... this afternoon i have the honor of accompanying the president for an audience with his majesty the king. the close relationship between our two countries at the highest level. lastly, at the bilateral meetings we had... discussion a partnership. thailand is the oldest ally of u.s. in asia and a long lasting one with commitment to democracy, human rights and free markets. i expressed to the president that it is my firm commitment to the people to preserve and protect the democratic system and i have shared the president's support of democracy in thailand. and democracy will lead to economic prospects. we look to the future and
Search Results 0 to 42 of about 43 (some duplicates have been removed)